The present invention relates to modified neurotoxins, particularly modified Clostridial neurotoxins, and use thereof to treat various disorders, including neuromuscular disorders, autonomic nervous system disorders and pain.
The clinical use of botulinum toxin serotype A (herein after “BoNT/A”), a serotype of Clostridial neurotoxin, represents one of the most dramatic role reversals in modern medicine: a potent biologic toxin transformed into a therapeutic agent. BoNT/A has become a versatile tool in the treatment of a wide variety of disorders and conditions characterized by muscle hyperactivity, autonomic nervous system hyperactivity and/or pain.
One of the reasons that BoNT/A has been selected over the other serotypes, for example serotypes B, C.sub.1, D, E, F and G, for clinical use is that BoNT/A has a substantially longer lasting therapeutic effect. In other words, the inhibitory effect of BoNT/A is more persistent. Therefore, the other serotypes of botulinum toxins could potentially be effectively used in a clinical environment if their biological persistence could be enhanced. For example, parotoid sialocele is a condition where the patient suffers from excessive salivation. Sanders et al. disclose in their patent that serotype D may be very effective in reducing excessive salivation. However, the biological persistence of serotype D botulinum toxin is relatively short and thus may not be practical for clinical use. If the biological persistence of serotype D may be enhanced, it may effectively be used in a clinical environment to treat, for example, parotid sialocele.
Another reason that BoNT/A has been a preferred neurotoxin for clinical use is, as discussed above, its superb ability to immobilize muscles through flaccid paralysis. For example, BoNT/A is preferentially used to immobilize muscles and prevent limb movements after a tendon surgery to facilitate recovery. However, for some minor tendon surgeries, the healing time is relatively short. It would be beneficial to have a BoNT/A without the prolonged persistence for use in such circumstances so that the patient can regain mobility at about the same time the recover from the surgery.
Presently, the basis for the differences in persistence among the various botulinum toxins is unknown. However, there are two main theories explaining the differences in the persistence of the toxins. Without wishing to be bound by any theory of operation or mechanism of action, these theories will be discussed briefly below. The first theory proposes that the persistence of a toxin depends on which target protein and where on that target protein that toxin attacks. Raciborska et al., Can. J. Physiol. Pharmcol. 77:679-688 (1999). For example, SNAP-25 and VAMP are proteins required for vesicular docking, a necessary step for vesicular exocytosis. BoNT/A cleaves the target protein SNAP-25 and BoNT/B cleaves the target protein VAMP, respectively. The effect of each is similar in that cleavage of either protein compromises the ability of a neuron to release neurotransmitters via exocytosis. However, damaged VAMP may be more easily replaced with new ones that damaged SNAP-25, for example by replacement synthesis. Therefore, since it takes longer for cells to synthesize new SNAP-25 proteins to replace damaged ones, BoNT/A has longer persistence. Id. At 685.
Additionally, the site of cleavage by a toxin may dictate how quickly the damaged target proteins may be replaced. For example, BoNT/A and E both cleave SNAP-25. However, they cleave at different sites and BoNT/E causes shorter-lasting paralysis in patients, compared with BoNT/A. Id. At 685-6.
The second theory proposes that the particular persistence of a toxin depends on its particular intracellular half-life, or stability, i.e., the longer the toxin is available in the cell, the longer the effect. Keller et al., FEBS Letters 456:137-42 (1999). Many factors contribute to the intracellular stability of a toxin, but primarily, the better it is able to resist the metabolic actions of intracellular proteases to break it down, the more stable it is. Erdal et al. Naunyn-schmiedeber's Arch. Pharmacol. 351:67-78 (1995).
In general, the ability of a molecule to resist metabolic actions of intracellular proteases may depend on its structures. For example, the primary structure of a molecule may include a unique primary sequence which may cause the molecule to be easily degraded by proteases or difficult to be degraded. For example, Varshaysky A. describes polypeptides terminating with certain amino acids are more susceptible to degrading proteases. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93:12142-12149 (1996).
Furthermore, intracellular enzymes are known to modify molecules, for example polypeptides through, for example, N-glycosylation, phosphorylation etc. this kind of modification will be referred to herein as “secondary modification”. “Secondary modification” often refers to the modification of endogenous molecules, for example, polypeptides after they are translated from RNAs. However, as used herein, “secondary modification” may also refer to an enzyme's, for example an intracellular enzyme's, ability to modify exogenous molecules. For example, after a patient is administered with exogenous molecules, e.g. drugs, these molecules may undergo a secondary modification by the action of the patient's enzymes, for example intracellular enzymes.
Certain secondary modifications of molecules, for example polypeptides, may resist or facilitate the actions of degrading proteases. These secondary modifications may, among other things, (1) affect the ability of a degrading protease to act directly on the molecule and/or (2) affect the ability of the molecules to be sequestered into vesicles to be protected against these degrading proteases.
There is a need to have modified neurotoxins which have efficacies of the various botulinum toxin serotypes, but with altered biological persistence, and methods for preparing such toxins.